On 2/25/25 1:45 PM, martin.kal...@canonical.com wrote:
> On Tue, 2025-02-25 at 13:34 +0100, Felix Huettner wrote:
>> On Tue, Feb 25, 2025 at 12:01:19AM +0100, Dumitru Ceara wrote:
>>> The functions manipulating 'struct ar_entry' records were not
>>> really
>>> using a uniform style.
>>>
>>> Fixes: f2deb24c5c43 ("northd: Sync Advertised_Route to sb.")
>>> Signed-off-by: Dumitru Ceara <dce...@redhat.com>
>>
>> Acked-by: Felix Huettner <felix.huettner@stackit.cloud>
>
> I have just one question below, otherwise
>
> Acked-by: Martin Kalcok <martin.kal...@canonical.com>
>
Thanks, Felix and Martin, for the reviews! I applied this patch to main
and 25.03.
>>
>>> ---
>>> northd/en-advertised-route-sync.c | 22 ++++++++++++----------
>>> 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/northd/en-advertised-route-sync.c b/northd/en-
>>> advertised-route-sync.c
>>> index e4d24b5173..794a87cb3b 100644
>>> --- a/northd/en-advertised-route-sync.c
>>> +++ b/northd/en-advertised-route-sync.c
>>> @@ -241,7 +241,7 @@ struct ar_entry {
>>> /* Add a new entries to the to-be-advertised routes.
>>> * Takes ownership of ip_prefix. */
>>> static struct ar_entry *
>>> -ar_add_entry(struct hmap *routes, const struct
>>> sbrec_datapath_binding *sb_db,
>>> +ar_entry_add(struct hmap *routes, const struct
>>> sbrec_datapath_binding *sb_db,
>>> const struct sbrec_port_binding *logical_port, char
>>> *ip_prefix,
>>> const struct sbrec_port_binding *tracked_port)
>
> Is there a rule of thumb for when we use multiple parameters on a
> single line in function signature (like ar_entry_add) and when to use
> only single parameter per line (like ar_entry_find)?
>
In this case the only factor was the line length - adding multiple
parameters on a single line for ar_entry_find() would've made it grow
longer than the 80 columns we enforce.
Regards,
Dumitru
_______________________________________________
dev mailing list
d...@openvswitch.org
https://mail.openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/ovs-dev
